Table of contents
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Outcome in the Supreme Court
- Reasoning
- The impact of Brexit
- Case details
Article summary
IP analysis: The Supreme Court has restored the judgment of Mr Justice Arnold (as he then was)—Sky acted in bad faith when applying for overly-broad trade marks. Those trade marks were therefore partially invalid (to the extent that Sky did not intend to use them). The Supreme Court has also approved the High Court’s narrowing of Sky’s specification. However, Skykick’s appeal against the finding that it infringed was dismissed. This decision, of the highest authority, has clarified that a lack of intention to use a trade mark for goods or services included in the application can provide the basis of a bad faith invalidity challenge. The judgment provides guidance on the circumstances in which this type of bad faith will be established. Written by Giles Parsons (partner), Bonita Trimmer (consultant) and Alice Elliott-Foster (associate) at Browne Jacobson LLP.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial